re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by Sophandros on 5/31/12 at 8:33 am to CAJUNLXA685)

quote:People are responsible for the cost of insurance, the insurance industry's prices reflected that. That is basic econ 101.

Basic Econ 101 doesn't apply to a product like insurance because it is a hedge against risk.

quote:Doctors having to carry crazy amounts of malpractice insurance b/c of sue happy people, people running to the emergency room for every little scratch, the countries obesity problem and the health care cost that come with it, etc, etc.

If more people were covered, they wouldn't run to the emergency room for every scratch, more preventative medicine would be practiced, and nutritionists could work more with people to consult on their dietary habits, which would reduce the number of fat people.

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by ThaKaptin on 5/31/12 at 8:38 am to Pilot Tiger)

quote:yea so would I. But that's not realistic. Your car insurance rates are higher depending where you live because you have to pay for other terrible drivers and uninsured motorists. It's how it is.

Then I will pay the higher price. Nothing unrealistic about that at all. I am fine with it.

quote:We don't have a true free market for insurance and until we do, NO ONE can get made at places like NYC for doing crap like this

Yes, I can, because it is the beginning of the end of our personal rights. All the people that wanna make fun of us right wingers for saying that we are heading for a borderline communistic style of socialism should look at this right here. It is the first step.

Major change always starts out small. Once the precedent is set for this type of legislature, the wall that protects our right to choose how we live our lives is gone and they will start picking away at it one daily decision at a time.

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by CAJUNLXA685 on 5/31/12 at 8:41 am to Sophandros)

quote:If more people were covered, they wouldn't run to the emergency room for every scratch, more preventative medicine would be practiced, and nutritionists could work more with people to consult on their dietary habits, which would reduce the number of fat people.

But the govt. forcing me to buy insurnace, or better yet pay for the dregs of societies insurnace isn't going to make it better.

I think the country would be better off to let the private sector run and determine the cost of health care. I think with the govt. running it you will see a decline in medical technology advances, reduction in the level of care given, and people will have to wait long periods of time for surgeries they need now.

Ask Great Britian, Ireland, and Canada how public health care is working for them

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by ThaKaptin on 5/31/12 at 8:44 am to Sophandros)

quote:If more people were covered, they wouldn't run to the emergency room for every scratch

Instead they will all fill up the doctor's offices and force us to wait 2 weeks to get an appointment when we are actually sick.

quote:ore preventative medicine would be practiced, and nutritionists could work more with people to consult on their dietary habits, which would reduce the number of fat people.

You really think doctors taking a salary cut is going to promote the "better" healthcare you are describing here? Because if you do, then you are the worst kind of idealist. One without a clue.

You can look to other countries that have adopted similar health care systems and see the flaws. But everyone seems to think they it will be different here because we're America, we do everything better.

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by Sheep on 5/31/12 at 8:44 am to Chicken)

quote:Sheep, there was an article this week that said NYC population had dropped 1.5 million since some time period.

This is from August of last year: LINK, and it says that 1.5 million have left THE STATE of New York, but I don't see how that relates to Michael Bloomberg, or NYC.

quote:According to the study, below, in the last decade New York gained 895,150 immigrants from abroad. But at the same time 1.5 million people were fleeing the Empire State for greener states (or at least their lower taxes?). Overall the net population decline statewide due to migration since 2000 was 675,000. As for New York City, well, we had more foreign immigrants arrive to live here than any other part of the state (690,000) but we also had the highest loss of population to domestic migration (1.1 million people).

And I just showed that NYC's population INCREASED since Bloomberg has been mayor (at least from 2002-2010), which is COMPLETELY OPPOSITE of what the guy was claiming.

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by Sophandros on 5/31/12 at 8:46 am to ThaKaptin)

quote:Yes, I can, because it is the beginning of the end of our personal rights. All the people that wanna make fun of us right wingers for saying that we are heading for a borderline communistic style of socialism should look at this right here. It is the first step.

You realize that the Individual Mandate, which is the center piece of so-called "Obamacare" is a right wing creation, right?

It was the Heritage Foundation that initially conceived the idea in 1989. The CATA Institute performed studies and published a policy paper in support of the individual mandate in 1994.

In 1993, it was REPUBLICANS who introduced legislation that would impose an individual mandate. Interesting enough, Obama opposed the individual mandate as recently as 2008; I see his acceptance of it now as a form of compromise in order to get SOMETHING done on the health insurance front.

But what Individual Mandate is, always has, and always will be a pro-business initiative. In particular, it caters to the insurance industry.

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by trident on 5/31/12 at 8:47 am to Patrick O Rly)

quote:A lot of that has to do with the American diet being based heavily around carbs/starches. Fat is the big boogey man, but sugars (in all it's forms) is the bigger culprit when it comes to obesity.

Amen. Fat intake has nothing to due with obesity. It is the carbs and sugars that are slowly killing people.

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by ThaKaptin on 5/31/12 at 8:49 am to Pilot Tiger)

quote:Pilot Tiger

Would you like to give a response other than ?

Tell me how it's NOT the end of our personal rights? If they take away our right to choose how much soda we drink with our bagged lunch what is going to keep them from taking away our right to choose a sugary soda at all with our bagged lunch? Or put a "sin tax" on it like alcohol, tobacco, and other things that they have deemed bad for us? I'm not saying that alcohol and tobacco arent bad for us, but I am saying that if they can deem those things detrimental to our health and tax it heavier, then can do it with just about anything that could be considered that way as well. Hell they were talking about putting that exact same tax on motherfricking VIDEO GAMES here in Alabama not 2 years ago. Thank god someone with half a working brain shot that shite down.

If you can't see that this is a slippery slope to start down, then you need your eyes ajdusted.

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by Sophandros on 5/31/12 at 8:50 am to CAJUNLXA685)

quote:But the govt. forcing me to buy insurnace, or better yet pay for the dregs of societies insurnace isn't going to make it better.

The more people who are covered by insurance, the less expensive insurance is for everyone. It's about spreading the risk.

quote:I think the country would be better off to let the private sector run and determine the cost of health care.

That's what's been going on for decades now. And that's what will continue with the Affordable Care Act. The insurance companies will still control their prices. Look at states where you have mandatory auto insurance, for example.

quote:I think with the govt. running it you will see a decline in medical technology advances, reduction in the level of care given, and people will have to wait long periods of time for surgeries they need now.

The Affordable Care Act will still have insurance companies running health care. Nothing will change except that more people will have insurance and more people will be paying insurance companies and insurance companies will get richer.

quote:Ask Great Britian, Ireland, and Canada how public health care is working for them

It's actually working fricking great for them. I actually have friends who are from or who live in all of those places. They think that our system is fricking retarded.

Additionally, our current system COSTS THE MOST PER CAPITA IN THE WORLD.

re: New York Plans to Ban Sale of Big Sizes of Sugary Drinks.(Posted by Patrick O Rly on 5/31/12 at 8:50 am to Sophandros)

quote:But what Individual Mandate is, always has, and always will be a pro-business initiative. In particular, it caters to the insurance industry.

You're right, and it's fricked up. The government has been pandering to insurance companies for years, while at the same contributing to the rise in the cost of health insurance with things such as under reimbursement (medicare/medicade).